接受高等教育的机会和对精英政治的支持:努力、技能和教育作为功绩的组成部分

IF 2.8 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Hye Won Kwon, Jani Erola
{"title":"接受高等教育的机会和对精英政治的支持:努力、技能和教育作为功绩的组成部分","authors":"Hye Won Kwon, Jani Erola","doi":"10.15195/v13.a38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior research has emphasized perceptions of effort-based meritocracy (i.e., the descriptive belief that hard work leads to success), noting a rising trend in meritocratic beliefs across countries. The current study proposes focusing on three components of merit—effort, skill, and education — and on a less-examined form of meritocratic beliefs: support for meritocracy (i.e., the prescriptive belief that society should distribute rewards based on merit). Analyzing the 2009 International Social Survey Programme data, this study demonstrates the role of higher education in shaping heterogeneity in support for meritocracy. College-educated individuals seem to reject effort-based meritocracy while strongly supporting skill- and education-based meritocracy. In addition, the gap between the college-educated and the non-college-educated in supporting education-based meritocracy is larger in countries with broader access to higher education. These findings suggest that people may refer to different dimensions of meritocracy when supporting or disapproving “meritocracy,” calling for refined policy interventions to reduce social inequalities.","PeriodicalId":22029,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Science","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access to Higher Education and Support for Meritocracy: Effort, Skill, and Education as Components of Merit\",\"authors\":\"Hye Won Kwon, Jani Erola\",\"doi\":\"10.15195/v13.a38\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Prior research has emphasized perceptions of effort-based meritocracy (i.e., the descriptive belief that hard work leads to success), noting a rising trend in meritocratic beliefs across countries. The current study proposes focusing on three components of merit—effort, skill, and education — and on a less-examined form of meritocratic beliefs: support for meritocracy (i.e., the prescriptive belief that society should distribute rewards based on merit). Analyzing the 2009 International Social Survey Programme data, this study demonstrates the role of higher education in shaping heterogeneity in support for meritocracy. College-educated individuals seem to reject effort-based meritocracy while strongly supporting skill- and education-based meritocracy. In addition, the gap between the college-educated and the non-college-educated in supporting education-based meritocracy is larger in countries with broader access to higher education. These findings suggest that people may refer to different dimensions of meritocracy when supporting or disapproving “meritocracy,” calling for refined policy interventions to reduce social inequalities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Science\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15195/v13.a38\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15195/v13.a38","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

先前的研究强调了以努力为基础的精英主义观念(即,努力工作导致成功的描述性信念),并注意到各国精英主义信念的上升趋势。目前的研究建议关注功绩的三个组成部分——努力、技能和教育——以及一种较少被审查的功绩主义信仰:对功绩主义的支持(即,社会应该根据功绩分配奖励的规范性信念)。本研究分析了2009年国际社会调查项目的数据,证明了高等教育在塑造支持精英管理的异质性方面的作用。受过大学教育的人似乎拒绝以努力为基础的精英管理,而强烈支持以技能和教育为基础的精英管理。此外,在接受高等教育机会更广的国家,受过大学教育和没有受过大学教育的人在支持以教育为基础的精英管理方面的差距更大。这些发现表明,人们在支持或反对“精英管理”时,可能会涉及到精英管理的不同维度,呼吁完善政策干预,以减少社会不平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Access to Higher Education and Support for Meritocracy: Effort, Skill, and Education as Components of Merit
Prior research has emphasized perceptions of effort-based meritocracy (i.e., the descriptive belief that hard work leads to success), noting a rising trend in meritocratic beliefs across countries. The current study proposes focusing on three components of merit—effort, skill, and education — and on a less-examined form of meritocratic beliefs: support for meritocracy (i.e., the prescriptive belief that society should distribute rewards based on merit). Analyzing the 2009 International Social Survey Programme data, this study demonstrates the role of higher education in shaping heterogeneity in support for meritocracy. College-educated individuals seem to reject effort-based meritocracy while strongly supporting skill- and education-based meritocracy. In addition, the gap between the college-educated and the non-college-educated in supporting education-based meritocracy is larger in countries with broader access to higher education. These findings suggest that people may refer to different dimensions of meritocracy when supporting or disapproving “meritocracy,” calling for refined policy interventions to reduce social inequalities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sociological Science
Sociological Science Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
2.90%
发文量
13
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Sociological Science is an open-access, online, peer-reviewed, international journal for social scientists committed to advancing a general understanding of social processes. Sociological Science welcomes original research and commentary from all subfields of sociology, and does not privilege any particular theoretical or methodological approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书